Mineless Battlespace: Shaping the Future Battlfield without Conventional Landmines

ISBN: 1288289030

Author: Price, Michael J

Condition: New

This monograph examines the ability of the United States Army to shape the battlefield without the use of conventional landmines. The United States must determine alternatives to conducting warfare without the use of landmines. The humanitarian crisis landmines create calls for this and current and future technologies make it possible. Weapons that cannot discriminate between combatant and non-combatant will lose their legitimacy in the future battlespace. This study traces the evolution of landmines and their purposes. It then reviews current American, British, and Canadian counter-mobility doctrine in order to establish a foundation to build upon. With this solid foundation of the past and present, the study then progresses to address how the United States can shape the future battlespace. This study offers alternatives to conventional landmines through technology, doctrine, and training. Through their evolution, landmines have become an effective force enabler in the conduct of land warfare, but in recent times their usefulness has diminished. Situational and scatterable landmines have increased importance in the changing environment. The evolution of the humanitarian crisis from their use supports a complete ban on the use of conventional landmines. The costs associated with landmine use are mind numbing. Medical and rehabilitation costs alone exceed $750 million. The effects of wars long past continue to plague ravished nations. With current de-mining efforts, the estimate by the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation (VVAF) to remove the existing landmines exceeds forty years. Based on this, the evidence supports a total ban on the use of conventional landmines, both anti-personnel and anti-tank. Reviewing modern doctrine reveals that countermobility operations are very similar amongst the United States, Great Britain, and Canada. The other common thread is offensive action and maintenance of the initiative. The biggest difference between these three nations